Chicago school un-reform

The Illinois legislature will be given the unenviable opportunity in November to take one small step backward in Chicago school reform in order to prevent taking one giant leap backward next year.

At issue is what to do about one of the Chicago Teachers Union's top priorities: restoring the bargaining rights that were lost seven years ago when the General Assembly passed historic legislation that put Chicago public schools on the road to reform.

That legislation centralized control of the schools in the hands of a single person: The mayor. It created a model that has been emulated by other large urban school systems, most recently and notably by New York City.

Legislators recognized that Chicago schools had been hobbled by a series of work stoppages and by a decision-making structure that gave everybody some authority over how the schools should be managed. Management issues often devolved into a contentious haggle-fest involving teachers, administrators, principals and the school board. The result was predictable: the schools floundered.

School reform delineated roles: Teachers would teach and managers would manage. The teachers union lost the right to bargain and strike over a number of issues, including charter schools, privatizing services, layoffs, class size, class staffing, pilot programs and teacher assignments.

Deborah Lynch, the Chicago Teachers Union president who was elected a little more than a year ago, campaigned on the pledge that she would restore those bargaining rights.

Lynch and Chicago Schools Chief Arne Duncan have reached an agreement to push modest legislation that would grant teachers the right to discuss, and demand nonbinding mediation, with school authorities over most of those issues. The formality of mediation might put pressure on Duncan to reach some kind of agreement--although he wouldn't be obligated to do so. Teachers would still be prohibited from striking even if no agreement was reached.

The best that can be said is that the legislation apparently does no harm. It leaves ultimate decision-making authority with the administration and does not provide teachers with the right to strike over any of those issues. It gives Lynch enough to say to her members she did something about bargaining rights.

The question is, why does this require legislation? Teachers should have input on issues that affect them. But they already have that. No doubt, Lynch has Duncan's telephone number.

Lynch, in many ways, is a breath of fresh air. She is an assertive and thoughtful union leader. But one of Lynch's most oft-used pieces of rhetoric is that Chicago school reform was done to teachers instead of with teachers. That's unfortunate. Chicago school reform was done for children. It's good for everyone to remember that it's no disrespect to teachers to put students' interests first.

What's most disturbing is the rationale for the legislation that is quietly offered by school officials. They expect the governor's office and the Illinois House and Senate to be in Democratic control next year. If they don't accept a modest proposal now, it is very likely a reform rollback bill will be shoved down their throats. Rod Blagojevich, the Democratic candidate for governor, has given no reason to dispel such notions. Blagojevich, after all, voted against the Chicago reform law when he was in the Illinois legislature.

So school officials cut a deal on seemingly inconsequential legislation to avoid truly bad legislation. That's not a good omen for what political life will be like if the Democrats sweep the state election in November.